Was I unfair to FreeCAD?

FreeCAD is often recommended as the best free parametric 3D modelling program, but how useable is it really? I decided to test it out and compare it to Ondsel ES, as well as the Onshape free plan.
BEST FREE CAD / 3D Modelling software 2024 - I tested them all! • BEST FREE CAD / 3D Mod...
Join the Maker's Muse Community - www.makersmuse.com/maker-s-mu...
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 Intro
1:16 FreeCAD 0.22 Dev
1:59 Themes
3:06 Starting the part
4:22 Sketch workflow
7:17 Turning the sketch into solid geometry
8:51 Completed model walkthrough
9:40 Bugs...
13:06 Designing the same part in Onshape
14:28 What about Ondsel ES?

[@andreas.grundler]

As a Linux user, I don't really have much choice of software. Either FreeCAD, Blender or web-based CAD programs. So I am grateful that FreeCAD exists. It has been sufficient for my needs so far.

[@StarkRG]

Even if I was on Windows, I don't do software-as-a-service, I pay for a licence and I use it forever. Also, I'm poor, so even the few options that do have such licenses are usually way too expensive. So far I've been getting by with SCAD, but I want to try to get into FreeCAD since SCAD takes a lot of brain power.

[@urgon6321]

As a Windows user I don't have to punish myself with mediocre software developed by people who never heard about user experience...

[@boardboyd]

Plasticity has a Linux build, but I haven't tried it on Linux yet

[@ThiVitorino13]

@@boardboyd it works great!

[@zyeborm]

There are quite a few ways of running fusion on Linux. Onshape runs in browser. The are paid options if you need.

[@zeonino]

All of these comments here really remind me of comments for Blender 10 years or so ago. Open source always starts off pretty rough as it's just a passion project at first. Once it develops a critical mass of people that really start using it on a day to day basis, it matures very quickly.

[@srilemobitelsrile8809]

Few thing that I would like for FreeCAD. It needs to simplify the buttons. Make it that has "Office" ribbon. Explain errors and what caused it.

[@cccccccc]

Blender is 30 years old and Freecad is only 21. Yeah, it needs just a few more years to mature.

[@andrewwakefield4519]

@@srilemobitelsrile8809 Noooo, please no on the Office ribbon interface. I detest the ribbon! Personal preference, of course, but in this case, a very passionate personal preference!

[@youtubehandlesux]

​@@ccccccccBlender is really only 6 years old if you only count the time it has a functional UI

[@ihatepokemonthings]

@@srilemobitelsrile8809 It does and is configurable.

[@philip_fletcher]

"Yes, it might disappear at any time, so don't expect your CAD files to last forever." And therein lies the crux of the issue. I very nearly migrated from OpenSCAD to Fusion 360 but it was just at the point Autodesk 'locked in' all the users CAD models - effectively holding other people's property to ransom. For all it's faults, FreeCAD is very, very capable and currently has a huge momentum behind it. I would wholeheartedly recommend it to beginners now because by the time they become 'experts', FreeCAD will have matured further. There are quirks in all CAD packages but at least in FreeCAD, you will always be the owner of your hard work.

[@deltafactory]

This combined with their infeasible pricing model for small scale commercial uses is why I'm slogging through the FreeCAD experience. Now if only there was a well-supported parametric CAD file format to support migration..

[@SanderMakes]

Hard disagree with the beginners parts. If the beginner is already linux user tech savvy, by all means recommend FreeCAD, but having beginners not understand parametric design to begin with, now you're adding the instability of the design to the instability of FreeCAD. That's unfair to the beginner, who might be turned away from 3D modelling entirely, and to FreeCAD itself, because it's getting a worse rep. EDIT: I do agree with most of what you said, it's a problem. At my local maker space, we did a challenge of using FreeCAD for a month and a lot of people failed. They went "Yeah I can either do it in in 30min, get the design to the printer so I can prototype my design tonight, or I can spend the entire evening working around error messages." And these are dedicated tinkerers who like that kind of stuff.

[@mattw7949]

This. AutoDesk is the devil.

[@philip_fletcher]

@@SanderMakes I migrated from OpenSCAD to FreeCAD and although I've had some issues, I've not really struggled with it - admittedly, I knew about the TNP from my research into which CAD package to migrate to. If people are saying "I can do that in 30 mins in CAD pacjage X", they are probably trying to make FreeCAD work the same way as their old package - which is highly likely to end in tears! Easiest way to use FreeCAD is to try avoid sketches on faces, use a spreadsheet to offset those sketches and only add the pretty stuff (fillets etc) at the end. That said, the TNP should be all but gone in the next release.

[@-Kal-]

​@mattw7949 Pure evil. Between FreeCAD, OpenSCAD and Blender I no longer feel any desire to go back to Fusion. They're not quite as easy for beginners but CAD is more about knowledge of the fundamentals anyway. Maybe it's better not to have an easy crutch when starting out. A bonus is never having to worry about servers going down during a work project (true story).

[@Schmogel92]

Once 1.0 drops you should try it again. The big issue you describe is called "toponaming problem" and they implemented a solution from some other FreeCAD fork! Not sure how much longer until 1.0 drops but just a couple days they entered a feature freeze for 1.0 so now only bugs will be fixed.

[@MakersMuse]

I will, whenever that happens!

[@user-fr3hy9uh6y]

I saw a demo of the naming fix on another channel. I can't wait to download it.😊

[@Schmogel92]

@@MakersMuse Looking forward to it! Both 1.0 and your video about it

[@robonator2945]

I have never heard it called "toponaming". Topological naming yes, but I've never heard anyone try to shorten it down to "toponaming"

[@CodeWithNode]

@@MakersMuse Merge day is scheduled for June 24th

[@AndrewWorkshop]

Every so often I try FreeCAD again, thinking it must have gotten better and every time i lose my mind. I really want it to be more popular but it drives me crazy and i give up.

[@MichaelTavel]

You and me both. I keep wanting to like it. I sink another few hours into it every 2-3 months.... instead it just reminds me how it was put on this Earth to frustrate me and steal lifeforce from me. Then I just go right back to Fusion and it feels like magic from the future.

[@widget5963]

I had the same conclusion with KiCAD once a few years back. After a couple years, came back, and wow was it actually really good. OpenSCAD has similarly made large improvements, although you don't really do any editing in OpenSCAD itself. It's a bit unfortunate that FreeCAD hasn't seen a similar transformation.

[@ryan_nstuff]

@@MichaelTavel It's just a matter that freecad is made by a bunch of volunteers, and fusion is backed by a ton of money and companies. With the development of Ondsel(a company developing on top of freecad) things are already getting immensely better. That said, once you get passed the initial learning curve of freecad basically everything you can do in fusion you can do in freecad.

[@rainmannoodles]

@@MichaelTavel Isn’t it sad that Fusion (which is itself a truly garbage-tier crapfest) is still so much better than FreeCAD?

[@evanbarnes9984]

​@@rainmannoodlesI mean I used to use Fusion professionally until we switched to Onshape, and I've got to say, I like Fusion more. Both are fine, and I get by. But I swear that the developers of all these programs must not actually use them, because they leave major bugs and usability problems in place for like a decade. I really want to use and like FreeCAD, but I'm not looking for a premature afterlife punishment.

[@KirinDave]

Seeing someone confront the topological naming problem for the first time is strange. Its nostalgic, but not cozy. Its like that feeling you get when you realize someone else got sick off of whatever you just had

[@MisterMakerNL]

Thanks for you review! I also didn't liked how the old Freecad looked, so I made the new default themes that are now in Freecad. If other viewers think something sucks, please come and help! Together we can beat big corp CAD! Viva la resistance! There is a big theme's update waiting for 1.0, so stay tuned!

[@ciriousjoker]

Not sure if this is part of the theme, but I really don't like the icons. Keep in mind I haven't actually used FreeCAD at all yet, I'm purely a software developer who wants to try it out at some point in the future. - The bottom row after the first group looks pretty good, but the other ones look really dated imo, I'm mainly talking about those here - Visual weight of icons isn't consistent - Why is there an orange sheep with weird asymmetrical eyes? wtf? - First icon: white page with yellow thing on it. New file? Yellow hard to see on white - There are 3 icons with some sort of magnifying glass. No clue what the difference could be. - Some grouped icons have the same colors, but other groups seem completely arbitrary I know this might come off as completely shallow, but it's the little polish that goes a long way when attracting new users. I understand that finding a consistent icon set that looks good and also covers the unique 3d aspects of the program is really difficult though. Iconography for any other software is probably much easier.

[@janosszabo98]

Sorry sir, but I tried freecad a few weeks ago, and the fact that none of the dark themes were without issues was a deal breaker for me and deleted the whole thing within minutes. Pretty sure it's customizable, but those config files get lost or it doesn't help if you're on a different computer. I'd put the UI even in front of functionality of the program. You can have the best software ever made, but if it's not useable, it might as well not exist at all. If something is easy to use and have a clean UI, I'm more willing to put up with some functionality shortfalls. But maybe that's just me.

[@modernsolutions6631]

You were not unfair to freecad. You reviewed a certain software version and were accurate in your conclusion

[@foldionepapyrus3441]

Agreed, you can and should only review the version in use not the promises, and FreeCAD does have some rough edges. That said there is still an element of unfairness when you come from being a Fusion (etc) user and expecting a very different program to follow the same workflows and have the same behaviour you have grown to expect. So to some extent FreeCAD was being treated unfairly as different isn't inherently worse, and it has been a very good capable tool as long as you have trained yourself to think in the way it works - once you learn how to work with it is really good despite the flaws and rough edges (though most are well underway for being fixed it seems). Much like OpenSCAD, hugely powerful but a pretty steep learning curve and you have to train yourself to think the right way to make good use of it.

[@hanswurst9866]

And that version was not even the best version, since he continues to not even mention the Linkstage3 = realthunder branch of Freecad that resolves the topographical naming problem for the most part.

[@MCTrapsandTutorials]

​@@hanswurst9866ok and hopefully that will be included in the main version someday. But if you tell the average person to use freecad now, they are not going to use a fork of the main version.

[@SSSnackEater]

From my experience, I learnt two points that are very important to avoid breaking the model when modifying the previous steps. 1. Use the built-in spreadsheet feature to store all your parameters so that you can go back to the spreadsheet to change parameter instead of going back to the sketch. It will be painful to name all parameters but you can draft on paper and mark them a, b, c, etc. 2. Try your best to make every steps independent of the previous steps. E.g. adding fillet or chamfer at the very last steps. And instead of using the edges or surface built from the previous steps, you can copy and paste the sketch and edit the copied version. Since the parameters are based on the spreadsheet, you can always change the parameter on the spreadsheet and all sketches will be changed. That's how the spreadsheet you created can help.

[@TheRealClutch1010]

The fillet broke due to topological naming changes. You created new geometry and the fillet is not attached to edges that are named differently now. FreeCAD is very aware of this and is working to correct this and make it more straight forward to work. FreeCAD, for being a free and open source project, is a decent package. I don't believe it is ready for users new to CAD, but once you start to learn some best practices it can be made to work. It is nice to see your re-examination of FreeCAD and I agree with your assessments. Luckily the community for FreeCAD is continuing to grow and there are great things on the horizon.

[@drstefankrank]

I was new to CAD and I started with FreeCAD. Being aware of the issues is currently needed. It may not be as easy as some other non-free Software, but I'm happily accepting that for the reason of true freedom.

[@MarkFraserWeather]

With the latest dev versions it does at least put a '?' before a broken chamfer or fillet.

[@rainmannoodles]

The fact the TNP patch only solves one very specific failure mode out of many proves that the developers don’t know what they’re doing. A fundamental flaw in the geometry kernel is absolutely inexcusable when that is literally the entire purpose of the software.

[@hanswurst9866]

It's a bit baffling how people told him the exact same things in the last video's comments and he just refuses to learn.

[@zeendaniels5809]

I think FreeCAD is best suited for someone new... Because if you are already used to some CAD package trying to get rid of licenses and subscriptions, there's really no going back, the learning curve will be unbearable. Personal experience.

[@JohnUllrey]

Been using FreeCAD for years because I only use Linux at home and also don't like the the licensing restrictions of the "Free" versions of commercial CAD software. I regularly break my models and have to delete each change back to what is broken and then reapply all the changes again. (I make notes in a notepad as I delete the features.) Even with all of it's quirks I will continue to use FreeCAD because at this point it is all I know and the prospect of leaning a new workflow just seems like too much work. Wow, it just dawned on me that it sounds like I'm justifying staying in an abusive relationship because it is all I know and and I'm afraid to start over. ;-)

[@martinmckee5333]

I use Fusion 360 at work and FreeCAD at home, because I actually prefer it. I have learned how to build in Part Design so that I rarely break models any longer (I mostly avoid referencing faces) so one of the major complaints is reduced. Still, I would absolutely agree that Fusion 360 is more polished and stable in almost all cases. I don't understand the hate that FreeCAD gets so often though. It's far from perfect, but it's extremely powerful (providing things like FEA, CFD, and CAM integration), and completely free and open. Price/functionality-wise it's pretty impressive.

[@darkrulier]

Give On Shape a try, there's nothing to lose and it is way more intuitive than freecad and you'll get the hang of it in no time. I have been using Solid Works for more than a decade for work and I can stand FreeCad but On Shape is like SW, easy peasy!

[@julienboucaron9780]

I have a similar 'abusive' experience with it too. Sometimes, you update something and a cut is broken in a middle of hierarchy, you have to delete some nodes from the top until reaching the cut, then you rebuild the deleted nodes and voila.

[@pewi9134]

Maybe the spreadsheet workbench in FreeCad can help you to recover with less effort.

[@ihatepokemonthings]

@@martinmckee5333 Datum on face to prevent breaking and reorient as needed less crash less error.

[@timb1648]

Thanks for going into this. I've been using FreeCAD for a little while, it's been basically my 1st CAD experience and have run into these history type issues when changing old geometry. I thought it was me.

[@jakobhansen1396]

Nope, but it also happens in other softwares they are often better at catching it but debugging becomes more random

[@martinmckee5333]

​@@jakobhansen1396I think you make a good point here. Fusion 360, for instance, often has references break if you make changes, but it saves references so that the whole model doesn't break - the parametric connection, however, may be broken so that relative positioning can break as well.

[@RobertA-hq3vz]

I generally avoid all these editing issues by creating new sketches on Datum Planes. Instead of clicking on the face of a previous Pad and creating a sketch, I click on the face and create a Datum Plane. Then I put a sketch on that Plane. It has the effect of making the new sketch independent of the previous sketch. At least I think that's how it works. When I first started using Freecad I liked it until I started editing and everything would fall apart. Eventually I stumbled on this Datum plane technique which seems to serve me well for the most part.

[@ujang0711]

Thank you for this

[@clytle374]

I totally agree. But it is usually easy to reattach sketches when you break attach points. I became proficient in it before I realized datum planes are better in many ways. I often know more about where I want a pad to end rather than begin. So I can create a sketch on a datum plane and then pad back to my existing body. If I change the existing body the endpoint doesn't change.

[@Andreas-gh6is]

Yep. And you can also reuse constraints... for example "Sketch001.Constraints.my_length" (I may be wrong). You can also reuse the extrusion length of a pad with 'Pad001.Length'. Those are some ways to avoid houses of cards.

[@AsiAzzy]

Your endeavors with frecad are on the right path to true parametric design. I feel freecad is loosely similar to Catia. When the model gets more complex in the prototype phase then it's really important to have a robust parametric model and understanding. This means the designer has to learn ways to make features updatable in the most stable way (involving more bodies, more boolean operations, having indepedent refferences based on equations, setting boundries and wraps and sepparation planes from other parts of assembly.. etc). But this also means that when something is a bit ambiguous to NOT update on quick shortcut the program does not even mention. The abiogus question must be properly shown to the user. I've been bitten off with automatic corrections done by Inventor (that is fairly more robust and rigid than Fusion, the little toy brother of inventor). Where an ambiguos feature was done and worked, but without my knowledge, assumed stuff. And later stuff was not adding up. Catia is the hidden CAD program that rules the world. Almost everything tehnical had some design done in catia. Automotive and aviation are at over 90% catia (in some areas even 99%). rest of industies are mixed with some Creo and NX and at some distant places maybe some solidwork or some inventor There is a reason for this: CATIA will simply NOT let you do anything ambigous. It will constantly error over error if you are a bad modeler. With some experience beforehand you learn what to do, what not to do, why that feature was ambiguous at some point, and teaches you about 3d logical thinking and geometry. And after that the resulted model (done by a skillful person) can be easily modified in every regard (because of the very strict ruling in early stages, just like freecad vs onshape as you describe) Also you found out that chaining many operations in a single body is not productive as any high level change may impact lots of things. Usually each feature is modeleld as a standalone body and at the end the final part is collection of booleans add/remove/trim/intersect operations betweeen the multiple bodies.

[@hansmaulwurf8027]

When fusion limited the hobby license I started to learn FreeCAD. It still needs a lot of love. They are working on having a more stable object. Each time you change something in the past names of features get recalculated. A line you referenced by name might now be somewhere else. Not many CAD software is running on Linux. I rather donate money to freeCAD instead to subscription.

[@3dparts4u-allvisuals4u]

FreeCAD has a steep learning curve and need workarounds for several problems you don't see in other paid CAD software. Like Topological Naming Problem (errors after changing earlier features), Chamfers that must be 0.01 smaller than the height of the solid to fully bevel a side and using multiple workbenches for different features for example. But as a free software, I think it's very worth it! FreeCAD also make progress over time, so it keeps getting better.

[@addmix]

To be fair, the chamfer and workbench issues you mentioned are the same with Fusion 360

[@3dparts4u-allvisuals4u]

@@addmix ok, I did not know (expected) that from Autodesk. Especially the Fillet thing, because in Inventor it works fine. Thanks for clearing up!

[@louisbrill891]

"I'll laugh, I'll cry, I might throw a chair across the room". Thats been my experience with freecad too lol.

[@shayes.x]

Ondsel being a FreeCAD downstream is neat, they seem to be pushing for upstream improvements which will better both products over time. Ondsel having an optional paid model is useful to drive the project as well.

[@giannismentz3570]

True. It shouldn't have to be this way, if your business is using free and open source software and you are making money off it, then maybe you should donate to and help the project, but yeah, most businesses are looking for freebies, anything they can get for free they will do so, even if they are making a profit off it, so if that's a way to fund the project, why not.

[@rubiskelter]

@@giannismentz3570 Making upstream contributions is an amazing way of paying back for using the code.

[@cimmerian100]

I recommend Engineering Maths' videos for FreeCAD models that don't break. I've been using his workflow and while it takes a bit longer to setup the results are worth it - once you get the hang of using Master Sketches / Datum Planes you wont get any more broken models. That said the toponaming fixes in 1.0 will be a gamechanger.

[@dougaltolan3017]

Until you need to move 2 features at the same time to avoid breaking the single continuous solid requirement.

[@cimmerian100]

​@@dougaltolan3017 Depends on how careful you are when doing your masters / datum planes. Obviously that gets more difficult as your project gets more complex.

[@superdau]

@@dougaltolan3017 That's one of the reasons why I do like the "Part" workflow a lot more than the "Part Design" workflow. Although my main reason to use the "Part" workbench over "Part Design" is that it plays way nicer with other workbenches and the tree like structure plays way nicer with my brain than the linear flow of "Part Design".

[@QTMagic]

I experienced the same problems with freecad too - I could draw parts, but they would always crash when I edited them. Sometimes I would have to redraw the entire part just to make one simple change. Having said that, i'm glad that I will always have my sketches. There will always be a free version of freecad so I will never be locked into an expensive monthly contract.

[@lv_woodturner3899]

I use FreeCAD. It does have a big learning curve, but for my needs, it is worth the effort. I appreciate this is not going to be easy to use for everyone. As you have mentioned before, being able to design our own parts makes 3D printers so much more useful. I have found a lot of useful STL's on Printables, etc., but often I need to design something for my project or to fix a broken part.

[@NewStreamLine]

I'm new to FreeCAD. As for parametric modeling, I missed the mention of the Spreadsheet option in this video. In the future, if I'm even slightly considering possible changes to the design of a 3D model, I would definitely start by creating a spreadsheet to store the parameters.

[@capitalinventor4823]

You don't need to start your model with a spreadsheet. It may be added at any time in the process. It may be optimal to create a model with the idea that it will be parametric, and make use of a spreadsheet in FreeCAD, from the start but it's not required. You are able to create the spreadsheet, add the parameters you desire, and replace set values in the model with references to the spreadsheet. It probably would be best to start with parametric values equal to those currently in the model. I've found that changing one thing at a time makes it easier to determine what the cause of a problem is. For example, if in the model the length of a line is 15 mm but it is then set to the corresponding spreadsheet cell that has a value of 20 mm, was it the change to point to the spreadsheet or the change in length that caused the issue. Perhaps a length of 20 mm causes the issue, which you may test by setting the length to a constant value of 20 mm instead of 15 mm. Or perhaps the wrong cell was pointed to and that was the issue. If the spreadsheet has an initial value the same as the current model value then when you set up the model to use the spreadsheet correctly there should be no changes to model. Then you will be free to test how the model reacts to changing values. Using aliases for cells will help you reduce errors because when you are typing in the formula for the cell you won't have to remember if it was something like Spreadsheet.B9 or Spreadsheet.B10 for the height of the object. There will be an entry Spreadsheet.object_height, or whatever alias you use instead of object_height.

[@owl7011]

To all new users. My recommendation is to actually stick to the older Sketcher workbench and Part workbench. When you need to move things around, use the Draft workbench, unhide sketches to use as anchors. This is imho the most organic way for us hobbyist to see our designs in 3D form. The newer, usually recommended Part Design workbench is most efficient when you already have a workflow with thought out ideas or established designs in 2D form that you now need to turn into 3D which is a more professional approach when it comes to product design.

[@johnmccardle]

I use FreeCAD to design my own 3D printable robot parts, and everything Angus says is true. I just work around it with some tricks: * A lot of parts I design have a "master sketch", which is totally invalid geometry of multiple "normal" lines, connected and crossing each other. Sometimes I'll even represent wheels, bolts, or other footprints here. This sketch can't be used to create a feature, it's just the single source of references for the feature sketches. * individual features get a separate sketch which is only one closed line as "external geometry" from the master sketch. So moving features on the master sketch will update this sketch, and adding new features won't affect it. You just can't delete from the master sketch or turn normal edges into construction edges. * pad and pocket all of these features, including polar/mirror/linear transforms or multitransforms. FreeCAD generally does not have any difficulty deleting any pad/pocket feature out of the middle of history when it's all based on sketches and supported by standard planes or datums. Supporting a sketch on the face of another pad or pocket is asking for trouble, though. * Chamfer and filet last. This is the most fragile part of FreeCAD and I generally just delete all chamfers and re-do them if I'm modifying history to add or remove features. I'm looking forward to the topology naming problem being solved, but for the simple use cases I put FreeCAD through, I am not going to mess around with other folks' branches - I'll just wait for it to get into the main repository, which seems like it will be soon enough.

[@ihatepokemonthings]

Fillets and Chamfers and the limit applied when faces meet can be annoying.

[@briannewman6216]

Freecad should currently be predominately used for relatively simple designs given its current level of development. Having said this, Freecad is continuously being improved so at some stage it should be a viable option for complex designs. A stable version with the topographical naming problem resolved should be released in the not too distant future. The chamfer and fillet functions are currently not stable so a design can be saved prior to adding these finishing operations and then a finished design done with these two operations. This allows the unfinished design to be changed without the chamfer and fillet functions breaking the design. Maybe this finishing function problem could also be fixed at some stage in the future.

[@frogsareop5623]

This is the Linux paradox exactly. "It's always being worked on, so eventually it will be viable." Maybe it already is or will be for some people, but for the overwhelming majority of people/situations, it still pales in comparison to professionally made, closed source software, which really sucks.

[@foldionepapyrus3441]

I'd personally say for quite some time FreeCAD is actually one of if not the best CAD system for the more complex models - the way it does parametric models with that spreadsheet is very powerful and stands out against the competition, though such complex models are always hard and have a serious amount of thinking required to make them work properly still. Its just that middle ground of more complex than really basic but not worth putting in the effort to think through the model and really use best practices to get that high quality complex CAD project result that FreeCAD is trickier to deal with.

[@Appregator]

I'd say it can do complex designs pretty well. So long as you know the workflow of the current version. In fact it is a bit too complex and covers ground in Workbenches that each takes some learning to get to know.

[@xankersmith9194]

You're almost right with that example, but you still don't get the freecad workflow. You wouldn't save it then change it. Instead you would make a rough part in the part-design workbench, then generate a copy in the parts work-bench and add the fillets there. Your design might break with later revisions, but all of it can be contained in freecad. Freecad has multiple workbenches for a reason, and part-design is only one of them.

[@Minty1337]

i personally use freeCAD as my main CAD software, it's free (obviously), and local, if my internet fails or something happens to my accounts, then i still have all of my models and software

[@chris993361]

They are currently working on a version of free cad that gets rid of the naming problems if you add or remove faces or, in the case of your fillets, the edges change names and so the fillet doesn't know what to attach to. This should go a long way towards things not breaking if you make a change. I don't know when it's available to everyone though.

[@randomblock1_]

Btw in Ondsel you can toggle the grid with a button in the second set of the bottom row of the toolbar, the one that looks like a grid.

[@raegun]

I tried doing the nightly builds for a while, the most annoying thing being that there's no guarantee the project will work properly from one build to the next. That's what stables are for. As such, if you want to create something you're reasonably sure you can reopen and tinker on in the future, it's not _currently_ possible.

[@makers_lab]

Around 9:30 when you talk about going back in time was exactly how I felt about Fc and was my experience some years ago. It's what finally led me to ditch it for Fusion, and evidently nothing has changed several years later. I'd made do with Fc for a long time, much longer than I should, and switching to Fusion was the best move ever.

[@erniepike3902]

I have been using Freecad for years, it is greatly improved over where it was when I started. I use AutoCAD and Catia at work, cause I'm old. It may be my own OCD but the thought of using a cloud-based tool frightens me, for the reason you mentioned as well as the design ownership. The change history is a problem that has presisted from the beginning fillites and chamfers are the biggest ones but any reference geometry can be lost. I think it is that points, vertices and surfaces renumber when one goes away, instead of skipping that number, IDK why they do it that way. One thing to help is to put new sketches on a datam plan instead of a part's surface as often as possible. but then the datum doesn't move when the size changes. IDK if the problem has improved or I have learned to work around it but it doesn't bother me as much now.

[@dtaggartofRTD]

Thanks for giving it another look. It's not perfect, but it has its own advantages. Thankfully that Topological Naming Problem should be fixed soonish. Cloud solutions make me nervous for that exact issue. They have your data, not you. If they go away, you're the one that's screwed. With something like FreeCAD, you're less likely to get rug pulled.

[@gerritvisser]

make a local copy, easy peasy. Save as Step just in case if you are paranoid. With FreeCAD there is already a history of breaking design changes, so you still lose your models.

[@dtaggartofRTD]

@@gerritvisser That's a lot easier to work around than cloud BS. It's not like FreeCAD auto updates.

[@gerritvisser]

@@dtaggartofRTD would love to know how you can get around the update=breaking changes. If module x gets deprecated or updated and your models rely on it then you are either stuck in the past, or redo the models.

[@MrNolimitech]

If your reference point of your polar pattern was on the edge (or point) of one of the edge that changed when you modified the sketch (Or your reference was in the center of the object and it moved). The reference might be broken. Most of the time you just have to right click on the sketch that is broken, and click on "attachment editor". Inside the first reference, you select the good plane for the sketch. I don't understand why it doesn't show you the error. Maybe because it's the bleeding edge version. Because normally when something is broken, it tell you what and where it's broken. (Most of the time) - What: Inside the Report view (everything that is wrote in red, is the error) - Where: You'll see a red arrow on the icon of the sketch.

[@gustavlicht9620]

Even if FreeCAD has downsides, it still beats anything where the makes can change the license/usage rights at a whim overnight.

[@Pongant]

Freecad is extremely powerful. It definitely helped me becoming much, much better at printing and designing

[@johnpickens448]

My table at OpenSauce two weekends ago was all about Open Source hardware and CAD software. I had signs up for both OpenScad and FreeCad. My FreeCad comment was that it is the best free, open source, GUI based CAD software out there...and it kinda sucks. My hope is that as more and more people realize that they need to own their stuff, and not rent it or rely on "free" commercial software for their design work, that FreeCad will reach a critical mass of users, developers, and donations to lead it forward. As you noted, FreeCad is improving greatly. I've seen more improvement in the last year than in the previous five years. I will personally donate substantially to a development bounty for a better user interface. Here's hoping. In the meantime, I mostly use OpenScad.

[@timsoft3]

using datum planes rather than surfaces to draw sketches is a way to reduce the problem, but you're right that changing things (if you haven't done that) is often problemattic at the moment. saving often as subversions is useful. that said, the cross platform opensource part of it I think is worth promoting as the greater the user base, the more developers are attracted to the project, and the faster it is improved. The fact you have no restrictions on use is also something that the "free" versions of some other products don't offer.

[@Stolz3D]

I have to say that I'm really impressed by your efforts to give FreeCAD another try. Of course FreeCAD is far from being perfect, but at least now you know what the current state of the software is and so you can talk about the issues and problems with it in more detail and in the long run this will hopefully lead to many new people finding interest in FreeCAD and some of them will contribute to improving it over time. Because I am convinced that it can be beneficial for all of us users, manufacturers, hobbyists, teachers, students etc. to have a great, working and polished free and open source CAD system. Thanks for your work.

[@alexandredevert4935]

I've been using Freecad for 5 years. You are right on the parametric model brittleness issue. I learned ways to mitigate it, ie. chamfers last, avoid referencing external geometry as much as possible, etc.

[@Gosuminer]

Having committed to using FreeCAD for all of my projects I can 100% confirm everything Angus says. FreeCAD is not garbage and it is free as in freedom which I highly value but it will not be a smooth ride once your models become more complex.

[@andrewwakefield4519]

Thank you for giving this another try.

[@hanswurst9866]

it was still surprisingly low-effort and most complaints are just a result of him simply now knowing (or bothering to find out) how to use Freecad. He is still not even using the linkstage3 version lol

[@wooviee]

@@hanswurst9866 "He's not even using a build from a dev branch to compare it to production-ready software" Please read this out loud to try and understand how insane of an ask that is for the average user.

[@andrewwakefield4519]

@@hanswurst9866 While I am an avid fan of FreeCAD and use it regularly, I felt that the review was generally fair. He is prioritizing some things differently than I do, and he acknowledges at least some of that (e.g., I think I remember in this review or the previous one an acknowledgment that not everyone will be comfortable with a model that stores data online or makes it public). Perhaps the only thing lacking that I would have wished to be acknowledged is the needs of Linux users, for whom the choices available are quite different. But, to my great sorrow, we Linux users are in the oft-forgotten minority. :(

[@blacklion79]

When I tried FreeCAD about a year ago, I found that some workbenches are in the middle of revamping: old plugin is discontinued and not recommended and the new one is not ready yet. I had problems with assembly and with some sketches which reference 3D geometry. As a result, the model which was constructed in F360 and Inventor easily, becomes a struggle in FreeCAD ...

[@Falney]

If you have to download the bleeding edge version and not the normal version to get anywhere near a good experience, you weren't being hard on it.

[@SneakyJoeRu]

Nice contour light. Directly below and behind?

[@phillxor]

I was trying to figure out what was going on there.

[@MakersMuse]

Yep just behind, for fun!

[@hanswurst9866]

I learned FreeCAD and really love it. Especially the Realthunder = linkstage3 branch that fixed the topographical naming problem and is being incorporated into the main version. I dislike the way all other CAD programs function now.

[@6yjjk]

If it's not released as stable, it doesn't count. No unfairness here.

[@logianer]

This! Who even reviews pre-releases?

[@snerttt]

​@@logianer He'd already reviewed the stable release and it was worse.

[@jakobhansen1396]

In the case of FreeCAD the stable version is very stable, but in reality the realthunder branch is the de facto standard if you actually use it

[@Voyajer.]

pre 1.0 software gets reviewed based on whatever is in the latest build.

[@htpkey]

@@Voyajer. That's an arbitrary rule. The people who visit the FreeCAD website will likely DL the stable release. The average user doesn't use github (for daily builds) or forks (like Realthunder).

[@SeanLumly]

Yes! The past-editing is a HUGE problem that makes editing a pain. It seems to me that chamfers and edges are being stored as indexes of primitives rather than being ATTACHED to specific lines, points, edges, etc. So as the underlying geometry changes, the indexes point to different things. This is actually a large problem with internal representation, and not necessarily easily solvable. But I certainly hope that it IS solved, because the package is competent, and the "workbench" plugin system is extremely powerful.

[@pizzablender]

The problem is they are attached to a certain face in the object. And when you change stuff, a new face can appear, changing the numbering, and moving your feature to another face. Where it maybe doesn't fit and doesn't get drawn. The TNP solution somehow solves this by creating more stable "names" for faces, to be used as reference. Note that there will always be some kind of TNP problems.

[@spock81]

I love that you're giving FreeCAD/Ondsel some attention here. I've personally tried FreeCAD a few times over the years but never stuck with it. I think it's great that you're spotlighting it and giving these critiques though. These are all important issues that will need to be addressed before it really becomes competitive with other more polished options, and I'm hopeful that with continued development and thoughtful input it will get there soon.

[@saulysw]

I watched the video where Makers Muse did all those free CAD reviews and, despite his recommendations, chose FreeCAD as the one I would learn as a newcomer to CAD. I agree with what he says here. It is not very forgiving if you make changes to early sketches, as everything builds on the faces of the early ones in sequence. I struggled with that a few times and the more complex a part, the worse it gets. You do develop work-arounds and techniques to minimise the issues, but sometimes you just have to redo things because they have gotten all messed up on what face they are connected to. It might put fillets on edges you didn't tell it to. It makes what is already a steep learning curve even steeper. I found myself saving often, and giving each save a version number in case I had to rollback. I feel like I have a fair handle on it now, and know what is likely to break, but it took a bit to get to this point. I do actually like the software, despite this. There is apparently a dev build about that fixes all this face mapping issue when editing sketches, it is very new and I think not even out yet - and that sounds fantastic and will be a great improvement.

[@runklestiltskin_2407]

You are answering the question I asked myself yesterday

[@PiefacePete46]

When you are starting out, the significance of being able to change some part of a design without starting from scratch is not always recognised. The more time goes by the more you love the programmers for creating this feature. 😍 🥰 For instance: your stepper motor supplier now only stocks the one you have been using in a long output shaft version. 😟 The longer shaft fouls the casing! 😱 🤬 You can cut the end off all the shafts... 😡 OR... Go back into your CAD system, make some simple (?) changes... call it "Revision 2", and Carry on! 👍 😃

[@travisgatlin536]

FreeCAD stable is one of the most obtuse and confusing pieces of software I’ve ever used, and I’m someone who learned blender in 2.4x I want it to be good so bad, especially as Autodesk continues to erode Fusion 360’s hobbyist version.

[@RaoulEvilD]

I feel you! Completely!

[@alexcrouse]

This is how i feel. It's just unusable unless you are the particular weird expert that programmed it. The rest of us have things to do, and will end up just using Fusion with it's limitations or pirating SolidWorks, because even free is too high a price for FreeCAD's insufferable mess of a billion useless features in an unorganized pile in the corner. FreeCAD's UI is unexplainably bad.

[@Berg085]

THIS. I decided to start learning on FreeCAD, but due to me using modeling software pretty infrequently, I would basically have to re-learn EVERYTHING about freecad any time i wanted to use it. After trying Fusion and OnShape, I just can't go back. Maybe some day, but not today.

[@martinsvensson6884]

@@alexcrouse Makes more sense to pirate Autodesk Inventor then if youre used to Fusion 360..

[@JG-nm9zk]

I actually liked blender's 2.4 interface. I haven't known where anything is in blender for years now.

[@75keg75]

In onsel did you have same issues of breakage? As it’s a layer over the base. I use fusion and as a autocad duster i find it really hard to use and breaks for no apparent reason.

[@Conno9220]

Use the OpenDark theme available in the add on. Also, is does this weekly build have the topo fix toggled on?

[@Mrstrikerace]

I've been using FreeCad for a long time and it is great. For free software without strings I'm very pleased. I especially like the feature to be able to take a picture of an item and scale it into the setup. I use Tinkercad daily but Freecad is my go-to for more complex parts. :-)

[@davidosterberg]

Awesome update. Despite it being a bit negative. This time I think you accurately represented FreeCAD, some of its features and I agree that you identified some of its main flaws. The good news is that progress is very fast at the moment. The model stability issues you encountered have actually been adressed in the weekly builds even newer than what you used. And I think the sketcher line color issue is also being worked on as well.

[@funkysod]

Been using freecad since 0.12. It has come a very along way. No license, no giving up all your human rights. Free and open source. Now also very usable. Nice of you Angus to take another look at it. Next version will be a major update so please revisit it again at a later date.

[@BeefIngot]

This is always the story with Freecad. Fun fact, people said the tnp issue would be fixed years ago. They said it was next update. It still isnt there. Worse yet its just one of many issues with the software. Its getting better yes, but at a molasses pace. The end result is that whatver the skill level, Freecad makes you notably less efficient.

[@funkysod]

@@BeefIngotYes you have a point. But I've actually experienced a vast amount of improvement. And the dev version for 1.0 is looking really good. The pace is slow but that's to be expected with next to no funding and a joint effort. You are of course free to use whatever software you like. I happen to like open source, native linux, free of charge. Even at glaciar developing pace. Been using for real life applications like 3d models for printing, or welding and wood working projects. Works very well for me. I stand by my statement, it will improve even further with the next release.

[@pizzablender]

@@BeefIngot _All_ CAD software has TNP issues. In any case, FreeCAD development had other priorities. But the project picked up a lot of speed recently and there are a lot of improvements (even on the TNP issue) coming together now in mainstream.

[@BeefIngot]

@@pizzablender This just isn't true in any appreciable manner regarding tnp and as I mentioned thats one of many issues. It doesnt change my conclusion at all.

[@TinaDanielsson]

Just for the funs I'm going to follow along and model a simple knob that has been on my todo list for a while. My chair is to heavy to throw but I've dug out an old keyboard I can throw at the wall in preparation. (Because I don't want to break my regular keyboard **doh**) Let's go! 😁 First issue: Tiny font in some parts of the app. Fix: Shortcut properties > Compatibility tab > Change high DPI settings > Check "Use this setting..." and "Override high ...", select by "System". Second issue: Error message "Wire is not closed." I saw no indication as to where the issue was. I had to zoom in and follow along all the lines in my sketch to find where it wasn't connected. I was unable to get the end points of my arc to connect to my two circles though. There was always a gap. I gave up and decided to model my part another way. Note: I think Angus encountered this when he tried the release version. Third issue: Error message "Wire is not closed." Once again I saw no indication as to where the issue was. Trial and error made me figure out that it wasn't possible to have an arc connected to a line that was longer than the distance between the arc points connected to the line. I had the line extended from the arc because I was going to add another arc to it after I tried to get the pad function to work after "solving" the second issue. Note: Angus encountered this too. FIRST MILESTONE REACHED: First pad created after almost 1 hour. Fourth issue: Error message "BRep_API: command not done" Got this error when trying to change the radius in the Fillet parameters dialog. Workaround: Create the fillet with preset value. Change it in the model properties window. I went back and made changes to my first sketch. All features updated properly. I had mirrored my part and then decided to go back and add some fillets to the body. I had no issues with that either. Workflow: 1. Suppress all features after the place I wanted to add the fillet features at. (Select model > Base > Suppressed: true) 2. Add fillets. 3. Move fillet features to the place I wanted it to be in the order of features. (Right click model > Move object after another object) 4. Unsuppress one feature at a time in order. (Select model > Base > Suppressed: false) SECOND MILESTONE REACHED: Added cutouts, fillets and mirrors. Part done. Took about 30 minutes. CONCLUSION The UI is definitely better than the release version. It's much less confusing. Even with a very simple model you still run into issues. So for me FreeCAD still isn't a good alternative. But fingers crossed it'll get there!

[@yanathecontrarian4863]

Thanks for actually reviewing it. As a newcomer, I didn't find your FreeCAD opinion in your previous video super informative, since it basically just sounded like "it's too different from the workflow I'm used to." Well that doesn't really affect me either way when I'm not used to any workflow! And as a newcomer who found it easiest to go straight to OpenSCAD (i.e. designing by writing scripts) instead of trying to learn CAD interfaces and paradigms, I do find actual information about how this all works much more helpful than just whether or not you personally found it usable.

[@ergosum5260]

Many thanks from a newcomer, I haven't used Autocad or Ashlar Velum in decades. I've totally forgotten Medusa on the Sun workstations.

Thanks for sharing this update, I was on the same side regarding Freecad UX and this is much better.

[@nrdesign1991]

What I need foremost from a CAD package is it to be dependable and not have weird quirks when it matters the most. A sharp learning curve is acceptable but not if the end result is a program with a mind of its own.

[@VictorEvangael]

FreeCAD plans to be at MRRF this year, and was looking for suggestions for things to do at their booth. I've recommended a beginner tutorial to them. Hope they go with it. Either way, I have to ask them about this video. :D

[@protonus]

Do you plan on reviewing the FLSun S1? I'm very interested in it but would love to hear your thoughts!

[@chrisdixon5241]

Hi Angus, I'm a long time FreeCAD user and I don't disagree with the points you raise. That said, as others have mentioned, what you are experiencing is related to renaming of faces due to modifications. This is an area that Onsel have worked heavily on and will hopefully soon make it back into FreeCAD. I would classify it as a querk rather than a bug, and FreeCAD isn't the only CAD solution to suffer from it, but I totally understand how off putting it could be for beginners. I would also note that the Part Design workbench is more of a "hand-holding", "on-rails" approach to CAD and that the Part workbench is more leanient in what it allows a user to do and potentially more obvious about why a problem occurs during modifications. Like any powerful and complex software, there is a learning curve to FreeCAD, but I do believe it is worth the time and effort, and it must be remembered that the developers are donating their work freely and with no expectation of anything in return, as opposed to some other CAD solutions.

[@Obsidianxenon]

I use freecad because I originally got it on a Linux machine. Now I use it because I'm used to it, but it isnt as bad as a lot of people say it is.

[@darkphoenix2004]

You got to learn it as most other programs, but as always if you are use to work with a software, you can work with it rly well.

[@BeefIngot]

​​@@darkphoenix2004No That excuse is just annoying toxic positivity. Even ignoring tnp the sketch system is soo much more tideous than other systems, the constraints work poorly, joints arent yet a thing, errors are not clear and very prevalent, timeline management is a slog and the list goes on and on. Once you learn it, it will still be monumentally frustratingly slow vs other modern cad packegs thaf youll even have the benefit of learning faster.

[@LincolnWorld]

I tried both the standard FreeCad and the Ondsel one. I have the exact same issues you brought up. I am sure that for some folks, those issues may not bug them. But it did frustrate me. If they could fix those things, I would probably switch to it. It's so close to being good enough for my needs, but it's not there yet. Please keep us updated, as I would prefer to use FreeCad.

[@codemakeshare]

I'm using KiCAD personally and professionally, and it's a little bit further ahead. KiCAD was the same a decade ago, and now it's really good. Not as feature-rich as e.g. Altium, but some things actually work better (e.g. I prefer KiCAD's push-pull routing). FreeCAD still isn't quite there yet, so far, and for many years progress was slow. I've tried to use it for a few simple things, but usability and learning curve aside, the way designs break and fall apart when editing is the biggest stumbling block. (It's the topological naming problem - it's just one of the things that are really hard problems, and it cannot be understated that writing CAD tools is just really, really hard compared to many other SW, which is why it's so expensive). But lately it looks really promising that it'll reach the point where it can be a full alternative to commercial tools for moderately complex designs. It might never be as powerful or streamlined as Solidworks or Fusion, but imho it doesn't have to - there are many users and use cases that only need the basics.

[@Craftlngo]

Comparing KiCad with FreeCad is like comparing apples to oranges. KiCad is a development system for PCBs. You can design your own circuits, design the boards and create list of materials. FreeCad is a design program for parametric constructions.

[@BeefIngot]

To compare freecad to kicad is to insult kicad.

[@martinmckee5333]

​@@CraftlngoI don't think the comparison is unreasonable at all. It's not a question of functionality, but development methodology. They are both open source projects that had periods of very slow development and been borderline unusable. KiCAD was helped greatly by CERN jumping onboard to help with development. In a smaller way, Ondsel seems to be having a similar effect on FreeCAD. With continued support, there's no reason to believe that FreeCAD will not continue to improve and, eventually, like KiCAD, approach parity with commercial options. Certainly FreeCAD has much farther to go than KiCAD, but that's more a question of magnitude than kind.

[@BrunodeSouzaLino]

KiCAD is more mature because CERN uses it.

[@BeefIngot]

@@martinmckee5333 I dont know about this. TNP has been solved and solvable for multiple years yet was not merged in. It seems like there is a problem thats higher level than resources.

[@PiroFyre]

I think even the stable old version of FreeCAD is worth learning. Did a lot of designs in FreeCAD stable. Definitely hated that my designs just "break" when I try to do something that FreeCAD doesn't like. I now have Solidworks and it doesn't completely break my designs when I do something Solidworks doesn't like. But for $48/yr for Solidworks, it's hard not to give Solidworks a try.

[@RegularOldDan]

I'm guessing someone else has already mentioned it, but the issue you encountered when adding the rectangular hole and losing your fillets is likely due to the topology naming issue that has plagued FreeCAD for some time. There was a branch of FreeCAD (Real Thunder, I think?) that was aiming to help fix this but I don't know that they have yet been successful. I agree, it's an issue and, thus, requires more forethought on a design. I'm fortunate that my designs are generally simple enough and I'm stubborn enough that I stick with FreeCAD. It helps that I was ticked off at Autodesk enough when they were making changes to the hobbyist license a while back that it drove me over to FreeCAD.

[@Jensenr8]

Your problem with the chamfir is call topological naming problem. The quick and dirty, it changes the name of a previous edge that you made when you made the new pocket.

[@Karaon]

Glad you now see the greatness of this software. The more of us use it the better it will get

[@MatthiasPrint]

While I was initially very happy with the option of FreeCAD in the CAD software landscape. As a beginner it's indeed frustrating at times. I've build hours on models to then just change 1 dimension just for the whole design to become faulty. The fact I'm a beginner makes it for me unclear if it's due to my own doing or if it's just a bug. Your video helped to realise the truth is probably somewhere in between.

[@ReedCBowman]

Every bit of the frustrations you're talking about, with rigidity of thinking on the part of the programmers, restrictions on abilities to do things for no clear reason, completely opaque errors, and especially random, unrelated things breaking when you alter things in the timeline, sound exactly like why I regularly end up screaming at Fusion 360. It always feels like it's version 0.8 (when I started using it, it felt more like 0.6, so yeah, it's improved, but still...). Based on this, I might try FreeCAD since it doesn't sound any worse. I will also agree about Onshape. It is the one and only CAD program I've ever tried that felt intuitive, and where all the behaviors I considered obvious and necessary actually work the way they clearly should. If it weren't for their Free version rugpull that they inflicted on all us early users, I'd still be using it and probably be much happier. But I don't consider them trustworthy because of that.

[@NullBlox]

Keep up the good work!

[@octodionis]

Hi, Angus! Have you ever used a 6dof input device like the SpaceMouse for CAD? I know it integrates well with Fusion but am still skeptical about the actual increase in efficiency they claim

[@pizzablender]

I do not think it does, TBH. You still work on a flat screen, where most precise work is done. And navigating by mouse and buttons is more precise. I have a "space mouse" but perhaps it has a learning curve. I never use it.

[@octodionis]

It's also odd to me because if you have one hand on the mouse and one hand on the space mouse, you can't use hotkeys as effectively

[@martinmckee5333]

​@@octodionisThat's the reason that the high-end space mice have context sensitive macro keys. You still have access to most of the hot keys you normally would. Given the additional learning curve and extreme cost of the upper-escelon units though, it's questionable how valuable an addition a space mouse is for someone who doesn't use CAD several hours a day.

[@Tcuel]

I made a model scale steel bridge in freecad. Scale 1/87. Being fully realistic and parametric. Besides own learning points, i really think its an awesome program. The bonus really being open source. Support will last. Unlike for example fusion who can just remove options for free users.

[@srilemobitelsrile8809]

I would like that FreeCAD becomes "Blender" for parametric CAD but it needs more information when you get errors, have "simple" mode ...

[@ElJefe42]

The beauty of FreeCAD lies in its ability to transform a five-minute task into a one-hour challenge.

[@user-fr3hy9uh6y]

When I make a series of parts, I really like the spread sheet function. I place anything that might change in the spreadsheet, and then I dont have to find and modify all the sketches. I"m looking forward to the release of version 1.

[@ThantiK]

That's pretty much a feature of all standard cad packages.

[@marcfruchtman9473]

Great re-review. Hopefully FreeCAD will improve over time.

[@baconstorm2259]

I love when youtubers post right as im pooping on company time

[@joeboxter3635]

A triple blessing: a job, being regular, and company time to watch KZbin. Very nice. Lol.

[@TS_Mind_Swept]

I'm not on company time, butt I'm still on the John 💩

[@braydonchatterton4304]

I get a nickel, they get a dime, that's why I poop on company time.

[@MisterMakerNL]

It's the best poop.

[@PiefacePete46]

Who gives a sh!t. 😜

[@MorvenLewisEverley]

I have bumped into all of these issues with FreeCAD too, once I got so annoyed a just gave up and re-drew my part in CADQuery instead! I have managed to get my head around why some of these issues occur though, I believe it is related to how a feature is linked to a parent. When you make changes to a feature earlier on in the history, I believe that change then re-generates the geometry and there is a good chance a later feature will now be linked to geometry that either no longer exists or the reference to the geometry is now different (this is probably why your fillet moved). I feel if the FreeCAD devs were able to engineer a way to catch these changes and flag to the user some suggested actions, this would go a long way towards helping newer users resolve some of these issues.

[@CYB3Rsynth]

Thank you for making this video and giving freeCad an honest try. Hopefully some devs out there will see this video and be inspired to jump onto fixing some of your complaints

[@juweinert]

12:08 You can actually do that. You can switch between defining and non defining external geometry with the same action as with manually drawn lines / construction lines. G,N would be the default shortcut and you can also use the "Add/toggle defining geometry" tool to begin with :)

[@enderger5308]

Actually, looking at a merged PR by Ondsel to FreeCAD, a fix for the TNP appears to exist in the main branch now (was enabled by default very recently).

[@nuttyDesignAndFab]

ive definitely had massive bugs when doing chamfers or fillets that intersect multiple edges. displays correctly, but features made after seem to have confusion about which edge is which, even on unrelated edges.

[@rcmaniac25]

Having done FOSS development: yes, it's a bunch of people doing things on their own and just merging them in. Unless it's a really big and well managed project (Linux, Blender, etc.) there is no management. The project owner basically gets the final say and, for example, they might go "thanks for the Windows PR... I don't use Windows so I don't know if it's good. Can someone else look?" and it could be MONTHS before someone goes "oh yea, looks good" and it gets merged. Nightly/Weekly builds are nice, but don't expect everything to work. They're often automated so "surprise, everything is broken" is to be expected. And if I can add something from industry (day job is software): there's always a weirdness around UIs... if Netflix makes a UI and then KZbin makes something vastly different, people will argue over who has the better one. But there comes a point where a company has to go "ok, we get too many complaints and questions around our UI... just copy the other UI" or program/service feature. And for FOSS, that happens all the time... you get that project owner who wants to call an extrusion "pad" when every other program out there calls it "extrude". Maybe it's time to swallow your pride and just call it extrude like everyone else so it stops causing friction and confusion and "ok, let me explain to you that they call it pad instead of extrude" from tutorial videos. Just make it easier for people.

[@regix1964]

I found that when you want to edit an existing body you better first add a datum plane and on that plane then you add a sketch where you define the changes. So far I think freecad is great software, but as I am still in the beginning of learning freecad I may encounter things that are harder to overcome.

[@k4x4map46]

call it like it is!! for most normal users you 'expect' updates to be readily available on the parent website...or at least indicate other versions available elsewhere

[@GabrielAlejandroZorrilla]

A crap, we are out of luck. The topo mitigation code got merged a couple of weeks ago. For sure wasn't in your April 29th release.

[@eliassalomaohelouneto8358]

FreeCad is good. The thing is that it i not a finished product. I try to avoid it, but I used to use it a lot. The reason I used it was for gears, because OpenSCAD does not have native gear construction. However, I gave up on it when I lost a whole project because I changed the default name of one of the objects for a more meaningful name. Still, I thing Angus is being a bit too harsh on it.

[@macbeardie]

Reminds me of Solidworks 2019. Previous company still runs that version (they are updating later this year). But holding on to old versions is very common, Solidworks is super expensive when you are maintaining 20+ licenses. These problems and limitations were rampant in that version of Solidworks, seems fine to me.

[@alkiskaraolis8111]

It also does not automatically merge surfaces that are on the same plane (at least that's what I see in your model). This might be a big problem if the split line between 2 surfaces are going to interfere with a radius that you put in a later step.

[@ivolol]

I hope FreeCAD devs are listening. Those dark themes could definitely use trimming down to 2 or 3.

[@phiasch]

a lot of the instability of making changes early in the process has to do with numbered features being re-numbered as the number of edges / faces changes which causes the geometry to be referenced to the wrong feature

[@Andreas-gh6is]

I only ever used Blender and FreeCAD for 3D modeling or 3D printing. I get my things done, one way or the other. FC is annoying as heck sometimes. On the other hand I like the way you need to plan and organize things to be parametric. Most people don't know how and why to use the reference planes/etc. Same with clone and boolean functionality in "part design" which allows you more options in nondestructive editing. Also I found I need to structure my "input" measurements better, for example by creating sketches outside of objects. Or naming the constraints, then reusing them through the expression editor. There seem to be some who are actually using FC professionally, but for most it's probably a timewaster.

[@plasticcreations7836]

To be fair ive seen similar issues in Fusion (even in the latest version) where you change the dimensions and something doesnt update. I can usually fix it by opening the extrusion window or whatever is broken and just click on save/ok and then it works.

[@rainmannoodles]

Fusion is utter garbage, but it’s still way better than FreeCAD…

[@piorism]

What would be a good guide/tutorial (preferably in text form, but video would be okay-ish) for users completely new to Freecad, but already familiar with parametric CAD concepts ? More specifically, I am looking for clear information about how the many "workbenches" relate to each other, what each is intended for, and their order of operation - with practical examples one coud follow to create simple parts.

[@thomasneemann5618]

thank you